A gunman on a high floor of a Las Vegas hotel rained a rapid-fire barrage on a huge outdoor concert festival on Sunday night, killing more than 50 people, injuring hundreds of others, and sending thousands of terrified survivors fleeing for cover, in one of the deadliest mass shootings in American history.
At least 58 people were killed and 515 were injured in Las Vegas on Sunday night when a gunman opened fire on a music festival crowd from the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino. It was the deadliest shooting in modern U.S. history.
Islamic State already taken credit for it. Apparently he's a secret warrior of Islam and nobody knew he'd converted including his family.
Better not top the leaderboards. Norway Nr.1!
Islamic State already taken credit for it. Apparently he's a secret warrior of Islam and nobody knew he'd converted including his family.
Better not top the leaderboards. Norway Nr.1!
Better not top the leaderboards. Norway Nr.1!
The usual regressive go-to narrative targets are not available, expect this to immediately turn into GUN CONTROL REEEEEEEE.
https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/914853465926639618
Lol Clinton is a fucking idiot. Yeah I'm sure the solution is to ban silencers, Hillary, if this shooter had had a silencer on his already illegal dozen automatic rifles this would've been an even worse carnage! Because real life is a Hollywood movie and the gunshots would've come out as silent "pft-pft" sounds. This is the reason we must ban pillows, if movies have thought me anything it's that shooting a gun into a pillow muffles all sounds.
https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/914853465926639618What the actual fuck?
Lol Clinton is a fucking idiot. Yeah I'm sure the solution is to ban silencers, Hillary, if this shooter had had a silencer on his already illegal dozen automatic rifles this would've been an even worse carnage! Because real life is a Hollywood movie and the gunshots would've come out as silent "pft-pft" sounds. This is the reason we must ban pillows, if movies have thought me anything it's that shooting a gun into a pillow muffles all sounds.
How was he stupid though? Makes absolutely no difference whether you're in a miserable pile or standing up.
This is the guy the virgin/chad meme was based on btw. I'm torn between respect for his giant balls and wanting to face palm at his stupidity.
Dang. This one hit hard. Seems they dont even know why the guy did it yet
Inb4 grandma takes out bingo group.
First thing I thought, they were having a music festival so this was his second reaction after politely asking them to turn the volume down because he was trying to sleep.
Instead of banning guns, we should really ban concerts.
who was "diagnosed as psychopathic, has carried firearms in commission of bank robberies" and "reportedly has suicidal tendencies and should be considered armed and very dangerous."psychopathic or sociopathic person can not be a suicidal type because they are not neurotic lul
"According to the El Paso Times, Benjamin Paddock, who was known as "Chrome Dome" for his shaved head, was captured in 1978 while running a bingo parlor in Oregon."
psychopathic or sociopathic person can not be a suicidal type because they are not neurotic lulMaybe suicide by cop?
Maybe suicide by cop?yeah sbc also, if its 'triggered' by fear,pain or in most cases guilt it's neurotic behavior
psychopathic or sociopathic person can not be a suicidal type because they are not neurotic lul#science
At the very least I wish we'd hear what pharmaceuticals these people were on.
Yeah, it's clearly the abundance of firearms, not like this guy had a bunch of military grade automatic rifles that are already illegal to posess.
Can you source this? It would be a great argument against gun control if he used a weapon which is illegal to posess, which means criminals/psychos will get their hand on these sort of weapons for mass-shootings anyways, but I can't find it anywhere.
Can you source this? It would be a great argument against gun control if he used a weapon which is illegal to posess, which means criminals/psychos will get their hand on these sort of weapons for mass-shootings anyways, but I can't find it anywhere.
You can hear the gunfire. Automatic weapons are illegal in US, only semi-autos aren't. Apparently he either had an illegal fully auto rifle, or (ilegally) modded his semi-auto for full auto fire.
Do Belgium's stats also only count whites?Does it matter? Belgium's non-whites don't have a gangsta ghetto culture. It's clear that America's do, and the statistics show that that is the real problem, not the guns.
Are you implying that Belgium has a gang problem like the US? Or that its black and Latino population are killing each other by droves all the time and by such great numbers that it has more than an insignificant effect on the final statistics? Yes, ideally you'd separate Belgium's whites from non-whites as well, but since those stats aren't available, the next best (and accurate enough for all intents and purposes) thing is to look at their complete crime statistics, since Belgium doesn't have ghettofied black areas with hundreds of black-on-black murders all the time.
Yeah. Generally if you're comparing stats from one country to another country, it's usually best practice to change the same variables for both populations. Otherwise you might be tricked into believing the flawed stats mean something. "If we take an incomplete homicide rate for the US, and compare it to the complete homicide rate in Belgium... the US is still worse"
I'm implying that comparing cherry-picked data from one country to complete data from another to try and make one country look less shitty is not very productive. I've never had cause to investigate the Belgian homicide rate.
Here's the great thing, if we could compare like-for-like data you'd probably be able to answer the above questions with hard numbers.
The last time I had this debate with an American I proposed that we compare a US State with any European country that has equivalent population and equivalent % black people living in it to get round this obstacle. They didn't like the numbers that came out of that. Apparently I cherry-picked to get the numbers I wanted rather than take national stats and ignore parts of them till they nearly matched unaltered stats for a European country.
Think it was Beauchamp, that seemed to be what he was getting at.It is not an assumption. It's a fact that Belgium does not have a black-on-black and latino-on-latino murder epidemic like the US.
It's cherry-picking because you've applied a filter to one set of data and not the other, based on an assumption you've made before looking at the numbers. With a view to artificially bringing the numbers from one country closer to another.
- Do I think there's an epidemic of black gang violence in Belgium? My assumption is 'no'.
- Do I think the homicide rate in Belgium would be lower if you did not count any homicides performed by black people? Yes.
Is it a fair comparison to compare two countries where you ignore a large ethnic group in the US, but keep it present in the stats for Belgium?
Old white guy with machine guns gunning down a country music concert.
If it was someone even slightly right-leaning politically the entire media would've gone insane with conconcted stories of evil white naz1 galvanized to violence by Trump's rhetoric. "No political affiliation", lol. Watch this guy's "political affiliation" emerge 2 or 3 days afterwards and not be talked about at all.
I'm sure the fact the target was a country music concert's crowd is completely irrelevant too.
And the memes of course, because "too soon" is not a concept the internet is familiar with:(click to show/hide)
Anti-gun activist possessing large arsenal of firearms? Doesn't make any sense. I'm currently anti-gun person because I don't own a single firearm, but if I were in America and had access to firearms, would probably buy couple pieces. At that moment I stop being anti-gun.
Edit: Anti-Trump also doesn't make sense. Trumps rhetoric goes in favor of gun owners. And profile of a gun owner who isn't game hunting in his spare time is very straightforward. I also fit in said profile, although I currently don't own guns. If you need a lot of guns for your own safety, which is the main reason to possess guns aside from animal hunting, then you don't have trust in your government. You don't believe they are doing enough to keep you and your family from harms way. Which means that typical owner of lot of guns is mostly anti-government person. But being anti-government doesn't mean you're anti Trump, especially because Trump still acts in public like he's opposing government and not leading it.
With that in mind I'm feeling slightly in favour of the perfectly rational group of people protesting, let me just check the videos/images from the day and...... oh they're all dressed as Nazis shouting 'blood and soil'... great...
Then one of them drives their car into a crowd. How very Nice of him.
Sometimes I agree or don't entirely disagree with the post, and sometimes I just haven't read it (but not in like a 'lul didnt read' kinda way).
I don't know what's wrong with me, I've gone off the usual flame-war with Oberyn. When the forum was busier and we would only ever interact on opposing sides after a terror attack or shooting it was one thing, but now that we're capable of agreeing and having normal conversations elsewhere it just feels a bit forced to suddenly go all-in flaming on a topic where I'm not even sure what we're disagreeing about in relation to the Las Vegas shooting. That we're both waiting for further information to emerge?
How does the receipt show that? Because he ordered two Pepsis?(click to show/hide)
Shooter checked into the Mandalay Hotel on the 27th, not the 28th as ascerted by FBI. Not sure how this could be relevant appart from authorities clearly not releasing all info to the public so far.
Also, the receipt shows there were 2 guests in the room.
Gun experts called bump stocks a “toy” and “something a gun geek would want”, not a mainstream product or a tool for serious shooters who care about accuracy.
https://twitter.com/IWillRedPillYou/status/915460305374892032
The demonization of fully automatic fire is hilarious. 58 dead after thirteen minutes of firing from a perfect elevated vantage point, at a largely stationary, massive group of targets... is fucking awful, and I guarantee we have the retarded bump fire device this guy used to thank for it. Had he been going for accuracy and aimed single shots, the dead would number in the hundreds. But no, let's ban the bump fire device that made him inaccurate and wasted all his ammo, because... well, no reason, except as one more step in the eternal quest of the left to slowly but surely ban more and more things.
60 dead and over 500 injured from a distance of 300m in 13 minutes doesn't seem that awful. I don't know if you ever shot that distance. I did, with iron sights though. That would be a lot of work with single shots for a 60 year old. Especially with the elevation fucking up sights. Muh rifleman's rule. He went for "bursts" for convenience sake and to get as much lead in the air as possible.We don't know what number of injuries are from direct bullet hits, so I didn't mention that. And yes, 300 meters with iron sights is part of the standard rifle qualification. With support, it's not that hard a shot, and optics change the game completely. 300 meters with a good optic is nothing. 13 minutes is 780 seconds. Five seconds per aimed double tap would be slow considering the abundance of targets, but even at that rate, he would've killed far more people if he wasn't a completely hopeless shot. I don't think the fact he was 60 has anything to do with it.
The demonization of fully automatic fire is hilarious. 58 dead after thirteen minutes of firing from a perfect elevated vantage point, at a largely stationary, massive group of targets... is fucking awful, and I guarantee we have the retarded bump fire device this guy used to thank for it. Had he been going for accuracy and aimed single shots, the dead would number in the hundreds. But no, let's ban the bump fire device that made him inaccurate and wasted all his ammo, because... well, no reason, except as one more step in the eternal quest of the left to slowly but surely ban more and more things.
I've been assured that if members of the public have firearms they can defend themselves and prevent attacks like this from happening.
I'm sure nobody in this country music gig in Nevada had any guns, otherwise things would clearly have been different.
QuoteIt also emerged that Paddock may have intended to target a bigger Las Vegas outdoor music festival the previous weekend. He tried unsuccessfully to book a room overlooking the Life is Beautiful event where performers included Damon Albarn’s band Gorillaz. That festival was attended by 50,000 people each day.
#Clearly hates country music and right-wing American values.
Whatever his motive was, if he actually tried and failed to book the same type of room a weekend earlier over an entirely different type of concert (but with double the attendance), then he can't have been too fussed about exactly who he was killing, rather how many he could kill.
Muh hands up don't shoot! Muh neighborhood watch racist stalker attacking poow innocent black!Zimmerman case was a fun one. Separated the wheat from the chaff, so to speak. Anyone with any skill in critical thinking and even an attempt at being unbiased saw that the media painted the case in a ridiculous light, and Zimmerman did nothing wrong, or at least there was no reason to think so based on the evidence.
#Clearly hates country music and right-wing American values.
For reference, an estimated 22,000 people attended the concert where the shooting eventually did happen. I'll indulge in a bit of rampant speculation here. It looks like he just wanted to kill as many people as feasibly possible. And it's shocking to us because we're used to mass shootings and attacks of all kind being targeted in some way. Shooters normally go after friends/family/workplace/school. Terrorists normally go for an attack in broad daylight near somewhere iconic, or try to disrupt the morning commute - maximum disruption and expose for minimal effort. This guy just wanted an overhead view of the biggest crowd possible.
Whatever his motive was, if he actually tried and failed to book the same type of room a weekend earlier over an entirely different type of concert (but with double the attendance), then he can't have been too fussed about exactly who he was killing, rather how many he could kill.
One in a million? Heh.
Many more hidden sociopaths walking the streets every day. Not every sociopath is emotionally unstable. Psychological tests are superficial for general population, I've passed with flying colors every time. Easy to fool person who can't wait to end shift and go home, thinking how most people are just right in the head and don't need to be thoroughly checked.
Especially with digital age, came also age of introverts and shut-ins who successfully fake social skills.
Also, not every sociopath has to be violent, to kill people. Most of them at some point do commit murder, but there could pass decades before that happens. Modern society allows different mechanisms to abuse people, aside from physical violence.
If we are talking about highly intelligent sociopath, you need expert to deal with him/her. Regular psychologist/psychiatrists won't cut it, intelligent people can easily fool those less intelligent than them.
Yeah, last weekend we had a lone acid attacker that killed 58 people and injured hundreds. Clearly without guns, the situation is just as bad. Oh wait that wasn't us.
I'd rather talk about root causes that can actually be regulated, using precedent from other countries that don't have the same issues. Rather than just smugly talk about factors that can't be helped 'meh, social issues', and accept that attacks like those will just happen forever. Weak-ass stance to take.
I'm sure you might find it helpful to look at this attack and say 'leftist' as if that's in any way true or helpful to anyone. Or look at a Jihadi attack and say 'muslim' again as if that suggests any solution to the ongoing crisis.
Either play the role of captain hindsight, leftist conspiracy nut, or make observations that don't provide any indication of ways to prevent future crisis. Like you always do. Change the mind of an entire nation, or regulate the tools they use to kill each other en mass. Good to hear you being the realist here, 'meh, social issue, nothing can be done'.
There are some things that cannot be prevented by regulation and some people you just cannot change. The UK has too long been a subject state or nanny state, big government simply does not work in the US.I love how the message basically is "gosh I could turn into a mass murderer myself! Better turn these guns in because I just CAN'T TRUST MYSELF!"
Virtue signalling really does nothing here, a truck or a bomb is just as deadly as a gun as we've seen from the Nice, France truck attack. Noone in their right mind would concede their constitutional rights to a government that cannot protect them or has foreign interests in mind. See it just won't stop with "turn in your Guns" and we know this by watching the ridiculous clown government you have other there. If we followed the UK model of Gun Control the only real change we would see here is that people would be cutting their steak with a butter knife 10 years from now while all of the criminals/terrorists would still have guns.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Yeah, last weekend we had a lone acid attacker that killed 58 people and injured hundreds.
Tbh I thought it was a good meme making fun of british knife laws. But now I see it was pretty much spot on. Wtf is knife amnesty?[/spoiler]
They regulate knives like we do guns in the USA. When you order a steak at a restaurant you have to call a special police officer to come cut it into giblets for you.
Yes it would be disrespectful to consider any options that might theoretically prevent a crisis like this from re-occurring :rolleyes:
If there was no crisis, there'd be no reason to discuss firearm control.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login(click to show/hide)
The focus on banning silencers (lolwat) and now bump stocks is fucking absurd. The left just has to leverage this into something political before the bodies have even cooled, I guess.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/oct/03/ban-bump-stocks-las-vegas-shooter-automatic-fire
Retards. Even this article says,
The demonization of fully automatic fire is hilarious. 58 dead after thirteen minutes of firing from a perfect elevated vantage point, at a largely stationary, massive group of targets... is fucking awful, and I guarantee we have the retarded bump fire device this guy used to thank for it. Had he been going for accuracy and aimed single shots, the dead would number in the hundreds. But no, let's ban the bump fire device that made him inaccurate and wasted all his ammo, because... well, no reason, except as one more step in the eternal quest of the left to slowly but surely ban more and more things.
I agree with you about the stupidity of the silencer talk, but I have a few objections about other things. I think that no one should need to own a full auto weapon. The only reason to own one is for fun or to utterly destroy something. I own an AR-15 and I can tell you I only bought it for two reason, just in case and for fun. In the standard caliber they come in it isn't useful for hunting and a 30 round mag is really just overkill for hunting animals as well. Only useful for hunting humans. However, I think in theory assault weapons are good for the general population to have in order for the government to be kept in check. But, only for that purpose.No one needs to own anything at all. That's not a good argument. Fully automatic rifles aren't any more lethal than semi automatic rifles, so there's no reason for them not to be available.
As for the bumpstock being less effective than just single fire? I find it hard to believe single fire would've been more effective. Maybe if he had his guns sighted in with scopes and was well trained. However, have you ever tried to shoot a weapon sighted in at a flat angle and then tried to shoot downhill at the same distance? It doesn't hit the same spot. I'm sure a trained person could compensate but he wasn't. Also, I think you underestimate how hard it can be to kill someone unless you are specifically aiming for vital areas, especially with today's medical care.Of course bumpstocks make you less effective. Every professional statement says this, it's just a gimmick. Why wouldn't he have his guns sighted? Why would he need to be well trained? He obviously thought it through and even had calculations next to him for hitting the targets (though why he'd have them when he was just firing full auto is bizarre.)
So in short, since he wasn't highly trained the bumpstock improved his chances of killing and injuring more people by increasing lead down range. The reason being that people are a lot harder to kill if you aren't able to hit them in vital areas. Ie, more bullets = higher chance to hit a vital area or cause significant blood loss from multiple wounds.That's not how it works; there's a reason Western militaries almost never use full auto, and that reason isn't because they don't want to put more lead down range for higher enemy casualties. It's because fully automatic fire when not in CQB decreases enemy casualties and wastes time and ammo. If you're not "highly trained", that's all the more reason to stick to single fire. You need to be "highly trained" to use full auto effectively.
He virtually had unlimited ammo and spare rifles. What was well limited was time and his target was a crowd. He didn't have nerves of steel either, at least compared to our armchair terrorist here. Keeping that in mind, burst fire doesn't seem that unlogical to me.Yes, and he wasted much of said time by spraying wildly. And he didn't use "burst" fire lmfao. I knew you lied about being in the military. Or maybe you didn't but you were a cook or some shit. They didn't even teach you what burst fire means. But then again that's probably not very useful information when cleaning pots.
No one needs to own anything at all. That's not a good argument. Fully automatic rifles aren't any more lethal than semi automatic rifles, so there's no reason for them not to be available.
Of course bumpstocks make you less effective. Every professional statement says this, it's just a gimmick. Why wouldn't he have his guns sighted? Why would he need to be well trained? He obviously thought it through and even had calculations next to him for hitting the targets (though why he'd have them when he was just firing full auto is bizarre.)
That's not how it works; there's a reason Western militaries almost never use full auto, and that reason isn't because they don't want to put more lead down range for higher enemy casualties. It's because fully automatic fire when not in CQB decreases enemy casualties and wastes time and ammo. If you're not "highly trained", that's all the more reason to stick to single fire. You need to be "highly trained" to use full auto effectively.
Hmmm, I have one argument to bring up about full auto vs semi-auto vs a large crowd of people. WW1 and the introduction of the machine gun, was it not able to turn one guy into a killing machine better than one guy trying to take slow well aimed shots? I know they used bolt action style guns but the concept I the same, taking slow, well aimed shots vs full auto. Now I'm talking about casaulties per minute. I know full auto fire is less effective when only shooting at one guy, but at crowd, come on.
Also your argument about not owning anything was genius. In that case if no one needs to own anything, why do you care about people being able to own full auto guns? They don't need to after all. So why argue about it? Quit your philosophical BS.
Machine guns =/= assault rifles. Machine guns are still used full auto or with sustained bursts, assault rifles are not.
It apparently went over your head. Because it's not about needs. It was YOUR argument that people don't "need" to own full auto rifles, and it's a fact that no one NEEDS to own anything, so that argument makes no sense. I'm sure you rather like owning things despite not NEEDING to. I know I do.
I see, well you're free to think what you would like. "Machine guns =/= assault rifles", that's good to know, now tell me how that provides any important information. Quick google search yield, Assault Rifle: "a rapid-fire, magazine-fed automatic rifle designed for infantry use." The only important distinction I see is that a machine gun is more than likely to be belt fed, ie more ammo. Still you don't seem to bring up any points to the contrary about full auto fire into a crowd over semi auto fire being more effective. Just cherry picking random, irrelevant things.It's self-evident why it's more effective. Most bullets are wasted with fully automatic fire, hitting nothing or non-lethal targets. That's why it's not used with assault rifles unless clearing houses or trenches.
It's self-evident why it's more effective. Most bullets are wasted with fully automatic fire, hitting nothing or non-lethal targets. That's why it's not used with assault rifles unless clearing houses or trenches.
That's not how it works; there's a reason Western militaries almost never use full auto, and that reason isn't because they don't want to put more lead down range for higher enemy casualties. It's because fully automatic fire when not in CQB decreases enemy casualties and wastes time and ammo. If you're not "highly trained", that's all the more reason to stick to single fire. You need to be "highly trained" to use full auto effectively.
Actually that is how it works. There are 4-5 light machine guns or automatic rifles in each Infantry Squadron of 12 + attachments from weapons company with more automatics or heavy machine guns. There's never been a higher ratio of automatic weapons than now in the military.How does any of what you said contradict any of what I said? You should try comprehending the context first, maybe. Do you understand what an automatic weapon is? Of course there's a "high ratio of automatic weapons" when literally every gun except for the antiquated M16s is capable of automatic fire. And as for machine guns, USMC has actually been moving away from them and towards more accurate, 30-round rifles for their machine gunners.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fireteam
With a SAW, the doctrine of fire suppression is the sound of continuous fire with rounds landing close to the enemy. While the M249's volume of fire may be greater, it is less accurate. Experienced troops who have dealt with incoming fire are less likely to take cover from incoming rounds if they are not close enough. With an IAR, the doctrine is that lower volume of fire is needed with better accuracy. Fewer rounds need to be used and automatic riflemen can remain in combat longer and in more situations.
With the M249 SAW, the idea of suppression was volume of fire and the sound of the machine gun. With the M27 IAR, the idea of suppression shifts to engaging with precision fire, as it has rifle accuracy at long range and fully automatic fire at short range.
IAR gunners consider the rifle-grade accuracy to be a huge improvement over the SAW, despite the loss of sustained firing.
How does any of what you said contradict any of what I said? You should try comprehending the context first, maybe. Do you understand what an automatic weapon is? Of course there's a "high ratio of automatic weapons" when literally every gun except for the antiquated M16s is capable of automatic fire. And as for machine guns, USMC has actually been moving away from them and towards more accurate, 30-round rifles for their machine gunners.
They are using the M27s to replace the semi-automatic m16's and m4's in rifle platoons, not to replace the m249. The m4 and m16 is the weapon that has been lacking in long range accuracy and suppression.Wut? It's literally used to replace the M249, but now they're looking to add more IARs. It takes 5 seconds of Googling to prove you wrong, which means you should've used those five seconds before making an obviously inaccurate claim. You can even find it on the wikipedia page of M27......
Wut? It's literally used to replace the M249, but now they're looking to add more IARs. It takes 5 seconds of Googling to prove you wrong, which means you should've used those five seconds before making an obviously inaccurate claim. You can even find it on the wikipedia page of M27......
10 seconds of googling gives you:
The U.S. Marine Corps is planning to purchase 6,500 M27s to replace a portion of the M249 light machine guns currently employed by automatic riflemen within Infantry and Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalions.
It is based on their HK416 carbine and was fielded to the Marines to supplant beltfed the M249 SAW in the Rifle Squad.
The M249's possible replacement, the M27 infantry automatic rifle, has already been deployed among Marines and is now carried by the automatic rifleman in each Marine squad.
The M27 was first introduced in 2010, originally meant to replace the M249, but the Marine Corps is reportedly considering replacing every infantryman's M4 with an M27.
USMC to replace M249 SAW with M27 IAR
Military.com reports that the Marines will be replacing the M249 SAW with the M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle.
Marine infantry squads will replace their M249 light machine gun with a highly accurate, auto rifle geared for fast-moving assaults
https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/off-duty/gearscout/2017/04/02/the-corps-quest-for-the-best-rifle-for-infantrymen/Yes, good job proving my point, retard. Rarely have I seen such a self-celebration of reading incomprehension.
Yes, good job provingyou areI am a retard. Rarely have I seen such a self-celebration of reading incomprehension.
" The Marine Corps started fielding more than 4,000 M27 IARs back in 2010, initially thinking they would replace the M249 squad automatic weapons. But ultimately the Corps decided it needed both weapons "
3 rifle platoons of 3 squads of 3 teams of 4, and every team has one automatic gunner, so how many of those have SAWs do you think brah?? ::::::thinking::::::::